RAILROAD  TRANSPORTATION 


ITS  BEGULATIOIT 


STATE  AND  NATIONAL 

AUTHORITY. 


HENRY  T.  NILES. 


URBAN  A,  OHIO : 
Champaign  Democrat  Print. 
1881. 


3^1 

b/Sfa 

C^'3> 


THE  QUESTION  OF  THE  FUTURE. 


"a 


o 


^WHE  proper  regulation,  by  public  authority,  of  the  transportation  of  the  pro- 
V  ^ucts  °f  the  tarm  and  factory  from  the  producer  to  the  consumer,  is  a  matter 
in  which  nine-tenths  of  the  people  of  every  section  of  the  country,  are  directly 
and  personally  interested,  and  must  be  one  of  the  great  questions  of  the  future. 

In  importance,  it  rises  far  aboye  any  that  has  eyer  agitated  our  people,  except 
the  one  great  question,  whether  we  should  be  one  country,  or  a  collection  of 
waring  States. 


A  matter  of  such  broad,  'vital  and  enduring  importance  should  not  be  considered 
in  any  narrow  spirit,  or  with  reference  to  any  class-interest. 

The  principles  ot  English  law,  which  is  but  another  name  for  the  common  sense 
and  spirit  of  fair  dealing  of  the  English  people,  applied  to  our  present  state  of  de¬ 
velopment,  would  give  the  question  a  solution  at  once  comprehensive  and  just. 
These  principles,  however,  have  by  a  variety  of  causes  become  so  overlaid  that  they 
have  been  lost  sight  of,  and  the  owners  of  our  great  lines  of  transportation  have 
become  a  law  unto  themselves,  and  the  great  mass  of  our  people  have  become  the 
despairing  victims  of  their  gigantic  combinations. 


In  the  early  development  ot  our  Railroad  system,  when  everybody  was  anxious  for 
Railroads  on  any  terms,  and  at  any  cost,  it  was  natural  that  neither  Legislatures  or 
Courts  should  hold  them  very  strictly  to  their  obligations  to  the  public,  and  since 
-Then,  Congress,  the  State  Legislatures  and  the  Courts  have  been  tilled  with  rail- 
1,  roac^  lawyers,  whose  interests  and  training  cause  them,  perhaps  in  many  cases, 
^unconsciously  to  lean  to  the  interests  of  the  railroads  and  against  the  interests 
of  the  people  and  the  spirit  of  the  law  itself.  This  tendency  has  of  late  become  so 
marked  as  to  attract  the  attention  of  the  gatherer  of  items  for  the  readers  of  the 
daily  press. 


-  In  his  letter  to  the  Cincinnati  Enquirer ,  of  November  18,  1880,  Gath,  one  of  the 
mo>t  observant  and  intelligent  of  the  professional  correspondents,  says : 


-  ‘The  present  Bench,  and  the  pending  appointees  upon  it  will  be  lawyers,  who 
e.take  stiff  views  in  favor  of  vested  interests  and  the  right*  of  property,  even 
^against  the  Government.  The  Supreme  Bench  is  being  made  up  more  and  more 
^of  Railroad  lawyers. .  Bradley  and  Strong  were  put  there  for  railroad  purposes. 

“The  Central  Pacific  magnates,  like  Stanford,  are  old  constituents  of  the  Conk- 
lings  from  New  \ork.  General  Dodge,  Gould’s  chief  engineer,  was  one  of  Grant’* 
old  corps  commanders,  and  has  probably  been  the  link  to  connect  Gould  and 
Grant  at  last  Pom  Allen,  who  controls  the  only  parallel  line  to  Gould’s  leading 
,from  St.  Louis  to  Texas,  has  just  been  elected  to  Congress  as  a  Democrat.  Joe 
I  Brown,  the  most  important  man  in  the  Railroad  interests  of  Georgia,  has  just  been 
^elected  to  the  Lnited  States  Senate  for  six  years,  in  spite  of  his  political  unpopu- 


2 


larity.  The  railroad  consolidation  through  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  Georgia  and  Ala¬ 
bama  has  been  done  on  almost  as  large  a  scale  by  Southern  Democratic  capitalists 
and  Northern  Republicans.  The  relations  between  these  great  corporations  and 
public  politics  are  such  that  the  campaign  funds  which  so  materially  influence 
National  and  State  elections,  are  hereafter  apt  to  come  out  of  the  Railroads  and  the 
Banks  which  affiliate  with  them.  There  is  not  an  important  name  in  the  United 
States,  with  possibly  the  exception  of  Thurman,  of  Ohio,  disconnected  with  Rail¬ 
roads.  Edmunds,  Carpenter,  Conkling,  Blaine,  Hayes — all  suggest  Railroads.” 

In  this  way,  by  almost  imperceptible  degrees,  by  act  after  act,  and  decision  after 
decision,  a  system  of  Railroad  law  has  been  gradually  built  up,  leaning  more  and 
more  to  these  great  corporations,  until  it  leans  away  from  the  principles  of  public 
right  and  justice,  more  than  the  celebrated  Tower  of  Pisa  leans  from  the  true  per¬ 
pendicular 

By  this  succession  of  favoring  Legislation  and  decision  the  great  Railroaids  of 
the  country,  protected  in  a  system  of  exaction  and  oppression,  have  grown  strong 
enough  to  swallow  up  the  weaker  ones,  and  the  strong  men  in  these  corporations 
have  in  like  manner  gathered  up  almost  for  nothing  the  stock  of  the  people  whose 
money  built  our  Railroads  until  now  two  men  in  New  York,  one  in  Philadelphia, 
and  one  in  Baltimore  control  our  whole  transportation  system,  andean  at  will  raise 
freights  over  the  whole  Country  on  all  the  products  of  farm  and  factory,  at  once 
reducing  the  legitimate  profits  of  production,  and  at  the  same  time  increasing  the 
cost  to  the  consumer  apparently  thinking  that  the  people  have  no  rights  that  a 
Railroad  is  bound  to  respect. 

Indeed,  it  has  come  to  this,  that  the  chattel  property  of  some  of  these  Railroad 
Kings  is.  more  than  the  entire  chattel  duplicate  of  several  of  the  States  ®f  the 
Union,  and  by  lending  their  surplus  money  on  call  loans  they  can  produce  an 
easy  money  market,  and  by  suddenly  calling  it  in  they  can  produce  a  public  panic. 

In  the  presence  of  such  startling  facts,  into  what  insignificance  sink  question&uf 
Bank  and  Sub-Treasury,  and  Tariff,  that  have  divided  the  people  into  two  great 
parties . 

Revolutions  have  been  produced  by  less  causes. 

This  is  the  evil  we  all  see,  and  feel. 

What  is  the  remedy?  We  need  no  revolution.  We  need  no  departure  from 
broad,  well-established  principles  of  law.  We  need  no  stretching  of  the  Constitu¬ 
tional  powers  of  Government.  What  we  need  is : 

1st.  That  the  people  should  be  aroused  to  a  true  appreciation  of  the  importance 
of  this  question 

2d,  That  they  should  not  allow  themselves  to  be  divided  into  hostile  parties  by 
designing  demagogues  on  unimportant  questions  to  the  neglect  of  their  real  in¬ 
terests. 

3d.  That  they  should  no  longer  allow  themselves  to  be  misrepresented  in  State 
Legislatures  or  in  Congress,  or  on  the  Bench  by  Railroad  lawyers  or  by  mere 
party  hacks,  who  can  be  ruled  by  Railroad  lobbies  or  bought  by  Railroad  money. 

4th.  That  the  Legislatures  of  the  different  States  and  Congress  should  use  the 
power  they  clearly  possess  to  protect  the  people  and  that  the  Judges  should  apply 
the  principles  taught  by  th*  great  lights  of  the  English  and  the  earlier  American 
Bench  and  Bar  to  our  present  condition,  and  the  remedy  is  reached. 

By  what  right  does  a  Railroad  exist  and  use  the  private  property  over  which  it 


passes  ?  Its  whole  right  rests  on  a  broad  and  liberal  extension,  not  to  say  stretch¬ 
ing  of  the  right  reserved  by  the  sovereign  power  when  parting  with  the  title  of 
land,  to  construct  over  it  necessary  highways  for  public  use. 

The  idea  of  private  gain  did  not  enter  as  an  element  into  this  right. 

Except  on  this  ground,  a  Railroad  has  no  more  right  to  take  my  land  and  use  it 
without  my  consent  than  the  President  of  that  Railroad  has  to  take  my  horse  and 
use  it  without  my  consent. 

Another  principle  connected  with  all  public  easments  is  that  every  one  may  use 
them  on  terms  of  exact  equality,  as  the  peasant  with  his  cart  had  the  same  right  to 
use  the  King’s  highway  as  the  Kobleman  with  his  coach-and-four. 

This  right  properly  enforced  would  cut  up  by  the  roots  one  of  the  great  abuses  of 
our  present  transportation  system,  which  is  favoring  localities,  individuals  or 
transportation  companies  composed  of  the  officers  of  our  great  Railroads,  which  at 
once  rob  the  Stockholders  and  rob  the  public. 

The  power  to  protect  the  public  thus  comes  from  the  very  nature  of  the  right 

of  Railroads  to  exist. 

* .  • 

There  is  another  broad  ground  of  common  law,  which  would  give  the  proper 
public  authority  complete  control  of  all  Railroad  transportation.  This  is,  that 
Railroads  are  common  carriers. 

The  English  Parliament,  long  before  our  independence,  exercised  without  ques¬ 
tion  the  right  to  regulate  charges  for  the  transportation  of  goods  of  every  kind  by 
all  common  carriers,  both  by  land  and  water. 

In  1692,  by  Statute  3,  W.  and  M.,  c.  12,  the  Justices  were  authorized  to  fix  the 
price  of  land  carriage  of  all  goods  brought  into  any  place  under  their  jurisdiction 
by  any  common  carrier. 

In  1748,  by  Statute  21,  G.  II.,  c.  28,  §3,  a  common  carrier  is  not  allowed  to  take 
more  for  carrying  goods  from  any  place  to  London  than  was  allowed  by  the  J us- 
tices  for  carrying  such  goods  to  Such  place  from  London. 

In  1751,  by  Statute  24,  G.  II,  c.  22,  §9,  commissioners  for  regulating  the  naviga¬ 
tion  of  the  Thames  were  authorized  to  fix  the  price  of  water  carriage. 

These  Statutes  were  all  to  be  obeyed  under  heavy  penalties.  This  was  the  im¬ 
memorial  and  undisputed  right  of  the  Government  to  regulate  all  carries  of  freight 
and  passengers  who  merely  used  the  public  land  and  water  highways,  while  our 
Railroads,  asking  especial  privileges,  are  especially  amenable  to  public  authority. 

.  There  is  another  broad -ground  on  which  the  Government  should  interrefere. 
There  was  nothing  more  carefully  guarded  against  by  the  common  law  than  every 
kind  of  combination  to  raise  the  price  of  daily  supplies  of  the  whole  people  and  the 
civil  law  showed  equal  care. 

'  \  ,  r  ,  „•  ,  j*,,,..  .  .  f .  • 

There  are  no  less  than  four  offenses  known  to  the  English  law  on  all  of  which 
degrading  punishments  were  imposed,  the  whole  body  of  the  offense  being  an  at¬ 
tempt  to  raise  the  price*of  daily  supplies.  These  were  forestalling,  regrating,  en¬ 
grossing  and  monopolies,  which  were  different  forms  of  getting  control  of  the  mar¬ 
ket  so  as  to  be  able  to  raise  the  price  of  supplies  to  the  people.'  The  punishment 
was  of  different  grades,  but  for  the  last,  which  was  considered  the  greatest,  the 
penalty  was  for  the  first  offense  a  fine  of  £10  and  imprisonment,  for  the  second 


4 

£20  and  the  pillory,  and  for  the  third  offence  £40,  the  pillory  and  the  loss  of  an 
ear,  and  to  become  infamous. 

Yet  now  men  openly  combine  for  these  unlawful  purposes  without  fear  of  the 
law,  and  our  Railroad  Kings  at  their  own  pleasure  make  the  daily  bread  of  half  of 
the  people  of  the  Country  dearer,  and  there  are  men  who  call  themselves  lawyers 
who  doubt  the  authority  of  the  Government  to  interfere. 

If  those  wholesome  old  English  laws  were  now  enforced,  many  of  our  Railroad 
Kings,  and  Pork  and  Grain  Princes  would  be  skulking  in  dark  alleys  to  hide  their 
infamy  and  cropped  ears,  instead  of  riding  in  Palace  Cars  and  seeking  fashionable 
resorts,  their  wives  and  daughters  glittering  in  diamonds  and  the  observed  of  all 
observers. 

The  power  of  the  Government  to  meet  and  correct  these  great  evils  is  ample,  and 
the  duty  is  commensurate  with  the  power.  We  are,  however,  met  at  the  very 
threshhold  by  a  confusion  of  ideas  growing  out  of  our  complex  form  of  Govern¬ 
ment.  In  England  all  power  belongs  to  the  Crown  and  Parliament,  while  in  this 
Country  it  is  divided  between  the  State  and  General  Government. 

The  Constitution  defines  and  separates  these  powers  by  perhaps  the  clearest  and 
most  exact  language  ever  used  in  a  legal  document,  leaving  in  general  to  the  State 
all  matters  of  local  concern  coming  within  State  lines,  and  giving  to  the  United 
States  those  that  reach  beyond  State  lines,  and  which  from  the  nature  of  the  case 
cannot  come  within  State  control. 

Still  State  rights  and  national  sovereignty  have  so  long  been  the  subject  of  party 
contention  and  have  been  so  much  talked  about  by  men  who  never  read  the  Con¬ 
stitution,  to  say  nothing  about  understanding  it,  that  there  is  great  confusion  in 

the  public  mind  on  what  the  Constitution  makes  as  clear  as  human  language  can 

% 

make  it. 

On  this  question  of  regulating  transportation,  the  language  of  the  Constitution 
is  so  clear  that  the  wayfaring  man  though  a  fool,  and  even  the  ranting  demagogue, 
cannot  misunderstand  it.  This  power  is  clearly  in  both  Governments,  the  power 
of  the  General  Government  beginning  just  where  that  of  the  State  from  the  nature 
of  the  case  must  end.  It  requires  the  powers  of  both  exercised  fully  and  in  har¬ 
mony  to  give  adequate  relief.  The  language  of  the  Constitution  is  :  “Congress 
shall  have  power  to  regulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations  and  among  the  several 
States,  and  with  the  Indian  tribes  ” 

The  power  te  regulate  commerce  among  the  States  is  just  as  broad  as  with  for¬ 
eign  nations  and  with  Indian  tribes,  which  from  the  nature  of  the  case  must  be  ex¬ 
clusive  and  absolute,  only  limited  by  legislative  discretion. 

The  power  to  regulate  commerce  within  its  own  borders  is  left  to  the  State,  or, 
in  the  language  of  the  tenth  amendment  is  reserved  to  the  State,  and  is  equally  ex¬ 
clusive  and  absolute. 

It  is  sometimes  claimed  that  commerce  in  the  Constitution,  refers  to  water  trans¬ 
portation,  and  that- it  cannot  be  made  to  cover  our  railroads  without  giving  the 
word  a  meaning  it  did  not  then  possess.  Dr.  Johnson,  in  his  great  dictionary,  of 
which  all  others  are  but  copies  or  revisions,  and  the  final  revision  of  which  was 


5 

made  in  1773,  defines  commerce  as  “Intercourse,  exchange  of  one  thing  for* 
another,  trade,  traffic.”  The  mode  of  transportation  is  not  even  alluded  to. 

Rut  the  42  article  in  the  Federalist,  written  by  Mr  Madison,  a  strict  construc¬ 
tionist,  settles  the  question  that  the  word  was  used  in  this  general  sense. 

lie  says:  “The  necessity  of  a  superintending  authority  over  the  reciprocal  in¬ 
tercourse  of  Confederated  States,  has  been  illustrated  by  other  examples  as  well  as 
our  own.  In  Switzerland,  where  the  union  is  so  very  slight,  each  canton  is  obliged 
to  allow  to  merchandises,  a  passage  through  its  jurisdiction  into  other  cantons 
without  any  augmentation  of  tolls.”  He  also  refers  to  the  German  States  and  the 
Netherlands  in  further  illustration,  the  intercourse  between  all  of  which  was 
almost  exclusively  by  land. 

The  States  have  in  many  instances  attempted  to  correct  some  of  the  grosser 
abuses,  such  as  discriminations  against  localities  and  in  favor  of  special  customers, 
but  their  efforts  have  in  the  main  been  abortive,  from  the  fact  that  all  important 
transportation  in  every  part  of  the  country  is  to  points  beyond  State  lines,  and 
consequently  beyond  State  control. 

There  has  been  but  one  serious  attempt  made  by  Congress,  and  that  was  by  what 
is  known  as  the  Reagan  Bill,  intended  to  prevent  combinations  and  unjust  dis¬ 
criminations.  This,  as  far  as  it  professed  to  go,  was  a  magnificent  bill,  clear, 
simple,  direct  and  effective ;  too  clear  to  be  evaded  and  too  stringent  to  be  disre¬ 
garded,  and  it  was  passed  after  a  fierce  contest  in  the  House  only  to  be  smothered 
in  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  Senate,  made  up,  as  Gath  says,  of  railroad 
lawyers. 

No  doubt,  many  a  railroad  lawyer  in  the  House  voted  for  it,  out  of  a  wholesome 
fear  of  his  constituents,  knowing  that  it  “would  sleep  the  sleep  that  knows  no 
waking”  in  the  Senate. 

There  can  be  no  hope  or  expectation  of  relief  from  these  evils  without  a  thorough 
reorganization  of  the  State  Legislatures  and  of  Congress. 

The  railroad  lawyers  must  be  left  at  home,  no  matter  how  long  they  have  been 
in  public  life  or  how  able  they  be,  for  the  abler  the  better  for  the  railroads  and  the 
worse  for  the  people,  and  all  those  must  be  left  out  who  accept  favors  from  rail¬ 
roads,  or  ride  on  railroad  passes,  no  matter  what  banner  they  may  fly  or  what  party 
shibboleth  they  may  cry.  „ 

None  must  be  elected  but  those  who  believe  both  in  the  power  and  the  duty  of  the 
Government  to  protect  the  people  from  oppression  and  spoliation  by  these  over¬ 
grown  and  insolent  corporations. 

Indeed,  the  country  is  governed  too  much  by  lawyers.  Many  of  our  most  valu¬ 
able  public  men  have  been  from  other  callings  in  life. 

If  Congress  and  the  State  Legislatures  were  made  up  principally  from  other 
callings  and  professions  there  would  no  doubt  be  less  talking  but  more  practical 
useful  legislative  work. 

It  may  also  be  necessary  to  reorganize  the  courts  by  removing  one  by  one  as  they 


6 

can  Tbe  reached,  the  judges  devoted  from  training  and  interest  to  these  great  corpo¬ 
rations. 

The  courts  have  almost  without  attracting  public  attention  been  organized  in 
their  interest,  and  there  would  be  no  great  harm  in  trying  the  experiment  ot  reor¬ 
ganizing  them  in  the  interest  of  the  people 

There  are  good  lawyers  enough  not  wedded  to  any  especial  interest,  and  who 
would  at  once  be  just  to  the  railroads,  and  just  to  the  people — and  even  if  there 
were  not  there  would  be  no  great  difficulty  in  finding  men  in  other  callings,  whose 
sound  common  sense  and  clear  perceptions  of  right  and  justice  would  be  a  full 
equivolent  for  the  smattering  of  law  which  is  the  sole  qualification  of  too  many  of 
those  who  now  bear  the  once  honored  name  of  Judge. 

To  accomplish  these  results  is  much  easier  than  would  at  first  appear,  for  it  is 
not  necessary  to  go  through  the  slow  process  of  forming  a  new  party. 

The  questions  that  now  divide  the  parties  are  much  less  important  than  many 
suppose. 

Indeed  there  is  no  question  touching  the  real  business  interests  of  the  country 
on  which  either  party  is  in  harmony  with  itself. 

There  are  gold,  or  single  standard,  and  gold  and  silver,  or  double  standards 
Democrats  and  Republicans,  and  hard  money  and  greenback  Democrats  and  Re¬ 
publicans,  and  high  Tariff,  low  Tariff  and  no  Tariff  Democrats  and  Republicans, 
and  it  is  impossible  to  tell  which  faction  predominates  in  either  party. 

Indeed,  on  the  Tariff,  the  question  of  most  practical  importance,  the  last  canvass 
was  ludicrous  in  the  last  degree. 

The  Republicans,  on  a  platform,  calling  for  a  Tariff  for  revenue,  with  incidental 
protection,  nominated  a  member  of  the  Cobden  free  trade  club  and  himself  in 
theory  at  least  a  free  trader,  while  the  Democrats,  on  a  platform,  calling  for  a 
Tariff*  for  revenue  only,  nominated  a  candidate,  who,  from  education,  association, 
and  conviction,  was  in  favor  of  a  Tariff  for  revenue  with  incidental  protection,  so 
that  the  parties  should  have  swapped  candidates  to  suit  their  platforms,  or  platforms 
to  suit  their  candidates. 

Indeed  for  want  of  any  well  defined  principles  on  either  side,  the  leaders  of  both 
parties  were  compelled  to  rely  upon  personal  abuse  and  party  names  and  party 
animosities  to  keep  their  followers  apart 

It  is  therefore  of  but  little  practical  importance  to  the  great  mass  of  the  people 
whether  the  man  who  represents  them  in  Congress  or  the  State  Legislature,  is 
called  a  Democrat  or  Republican,  but  it  is  vastly  important  to  them  that  he  should 
believe  that  the  Government  has  the  power  to  prevent  a  few  men  in  the  East  from 
lowering  the  price  of  every  pound  of  provisions  raised  by  every  farmer  in  the 
West,  and  at  the  same  time  raising  it  to  every  consumer  in  the  country  by  exor¬ 
bitant  and  unconscionable  charges  for  transportation,  and  it  is  vastly  important  that 
he  should  be  a  man  of  sufficient  intelligence,  integrity,  and  force  to  carry  this  con- 


7 

viction  into  appropriate  legislative  action,  no  matter  what  the  party  caucus  may 
say,  or  what  the  railroad  lobby  may  do. 

The  manufacturer  and  white  laborer  of  the  East,  and  the  planter  and  colored 
laborer  of  the  South  are  even  more  interested  in  compelling  the  railroads  to  accept 
uniform,  just  and  reasonable  rates  than  the  farmer  of  the  West,  for  with  his  new, 
rich  land  he  can  get  along  under  any  system  of  extortion,  while  the  strictly  com¬ 
mercial  classes,  have,  perhaps,  the  most  direct  and  obvious  interest  of  all.  Acting 
as  they  do,  as  the  mediums  of  distribution  from  the  producer  to  the  consumer, 
their  legitimate  receipts  are  in  reality  but  a  small  per  cent,  which  may  all  be 
absorbed  by  a  sudden  rise  in  freights.  Of  course  all  these  classes  endeavor  to 
shift  this  burden  upon  the  others,  but  the  result  is  that  it  deprives  all  legitimate 
business  of  that  certainty  which  is  essential  to  the  real  stability  and  mutual  pros¬ 
perity  of  all.  Whenever,  one-half  of  those  whose  interests  are  directly 
involved  and  who  are  to-day  convinced  that  the  correction  of  these  manifold 
abuses  is  more  important  to  them  and  to  the  people  at  large  than  anything  the 
party  leaders  have  left  to  talk  about,  and  will  resolutely  say  that  when  two  men 
are  presented  for  their  suffrages,  they  will  vote  for  the  one  who  is  thoroughly  and 
earnestly  right  on  this  question  and  will  vote  against  the  one  who  is  wrong  or 
doubtful  without  regard  to  party  names,  the  end  is  almost  reached.  Indeed,  if 
one  thousand  men  in  every  Congressional  district  in  the  country  would  take  this 
position,  the  next  Congress  would  not  only  pass  the  Reagan  bill  but  would  pass  all 
other  needed  Legislation  jind  if  the  same  course  was  taken  with  candidates  for  the 
Legislature,  the  eminent  railroad  lawyers  now  filling  the  United  States  Senate, 
would  soon  be  left  to  devote  their  whole  time  to  the  interests  of  their  clients. 

It  is  plain  what  is  needed. 

First  the  enactment  by  Congress  and  the  State  Legislatures  of  the  substantial 
provisions  of  the  Reagan  bill,  to  prevent  all  improper  combinations  and  unjust 
discriminations;  and  second,  the  enactment  of  laws  by  both  State  and  National 
governments  to  compel  the  railroads  to  accept  for  the  transportation  of  passengers 
and  freights  such  prices  as  experience  has  shown  to  be  just  and  reasonable  for  the 
services  they  have  voluntarily  undertaken  to  render  to  the  public. 

/ 

They  should  also  be  compelled  by  law  not  only  to  be  merciful  to  the  dumb  brutes 
they  are  transporting,  but  to  be  just  to  their  employes  and  especially  to  the  engi¬ 
neer,  one  of  the  noblest  characters  the  country  has  produced,  who  stands  there  at 
his  throttle  valve  day  and  night  through  heat  and  cold,  in  storm  and  sunshine,  in 
the  face  of  danger  and  death,  watching  with  a  vigilance  that  must  know  no  relaxa¬ 
tion  over  the  lives  and  property  of  the  people,  and  the  brakesman  who  must  on  the 
instant  be  ready  to  answer  his  slightest  signal 

I  know  these  ideas  will  seem  radical  to  some  who  in  the  hurly-burly  of  getting 
money  have  lost  sight  of  the  principles  on  which  our  institutions  rest. 

They  will  undoubtedly  run  atwhart  “the  stiff  ideas  in  favor  of  vested  rights,” 
of  the  railroad  lawyers  Gath  speaks  of  as  now  occupying  the  bench  or  awaiting 
appointment  to  it. 

What!  a  vested  right  of  a  dozen  men  to  rob  a  nattou  !  A  vested  right  to  take 


8 


his  hard  earnings  from  the  tiller  of  the  soil !  A  vested  right  to  lay  the  hard,  cold 
hand  of  avarice  on  the  laborer’s  daily  bread  and  snatch  it  from  his  children’s 
mouths ! 

You  may  as  well  talk  to  me  about  a  vested  right  to  shutout  from  God’s  children 
his  free  air  and  sunlight. 

These  ideas  may  seem  strange  and  radical  to  some,  but  they  are  ideas  that  lay  at 
the  very  root  of  our  Anglo-Saxon  civilization — the  noblest  civilization  the  world 
has  ever  seen.  They  are  ideas  as  familiar  as  their  alphabet,  to  the  great  lights  of 
the  English  bench  and  bar,  and  they  are  ideas  that  must  be  recognized  and  en¬ 
forced,  or  we  are  on  the  high  road  to  the  worst  and  meanest — the  grossest  and  most 
grasping  despotism  the  world  has  ever  seen — a  despotism  of  mere  money  over 

THE  BODIES  AND  SOULS  AND  THE  GOD-GIVEN  INALIENABLE  RIGHTS  OF  MAN. 


